Should a wine critic promote a wine ...

[Roy Hersh]

Should a wine critic promote a wine that they have never tasted?

I remember a major brouhaha a few years ago when this was raised about Michael Broadbent making negative comments on the quality of a specific wine (not promoting it) and then later having to admit he had never tried it. Maybe a bit embarrassing, but he was not promoting a wine. Actually it was the high alc. that Mr. Broadbent Sr. objected to.

That said, here is the case where a journo/critic freely admits he has never tried a wine that he then goes on to promote:

http://www.decanter.com/news/291766.html

Please discuss ...

[Andy Velebil]

NO. How the hell can someone write a tasting note on a wine they've never tasted. That is not only lying, but out right bad journalism, and IMO he should be taken to court for deceptive practices and forced to stop doing it.

[Peter W. Meek]

I see his point about wines vanishing from the shelves before the book can be published. Perhaps he should content himself with quoting experiences from previous vintages and then saying, "This wine is generally consistent from vintage to vintage; check our website for the latest notes."

If they want to keep this information private for buyers of the book, perhaps each book could be imprinted with its own individual PIN code on the flyleaf, which would be required to "get the latest". You would register with your PIN code, and each PIN code could only be registered once, to prevent PIN-sharing.

Final note: this organization must be publishing using truly archaic technologies. Anyone who needs to, seems to be able to get a book to market within days rather than months. Think of all the books taking advantage of the interest in disasters, scandals, and world-shaking events; they seem to show up on the stands within a few days. They may be not quite as pretty as a book that goes through a leisurely publication sequence, but this company has to decide whether it is publishing news or art. I would say that the latest tasting notes on newest vintages are news, myself. Maybe they should switch to a subscription website rather than printed-on-paper.

[Marc J.]

Huh??? You've gotta be kidding me! I'm speechless that he provided tasting notes on some wines that he had never tried....

Marc

[Peter W. Meek]

It may not matter what they do....

Check this WSJ article

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 53628.html

If you want to keep it, better save a copy, because they don't archive free articles too long.

It appears that the people we trust to rate our wines for us may not be so accurate after all.

[Mike Kerr]

How can a Senator vote for a stimulus or health care bill without having read it?

How can a politician decrie facts about a bill from someone who has read it as lies when that politician hasn't read it themselves?

Not necessarily wine, but the analogy is the same. It calls into question the credibility of the "journalist". Dan Rather was canned for essentially the same thing. When you're in a position of trust and influence, you do not have the luxury of making unfounded statements (or accusations). Supporting a wine and making tasting notes about it that are not your own when you are a wine critic would seem blasphemous to me, and if I were a fan of said critic, I'd probably no longer be one.

Full disclosure, I have not read the article, so have no factual basis that the situation is how it is, but just on principle, those are my thoughts.

Not to mention the idea of a wine critic officially promoting a wine (on the wine company's dime...not, again, that this is the case here) is a huge conflict of interest, and should bring into question that critic's results as biased going forward.

Mike.

[Moses Botbol]

I understand Broadbent's point of view as he was making a general declaration about wine and not a review of a particular wine per say.

Matt Skinner really made some poor choice the way he went about "reviewing" these wines. Instead of reviewing the wines, he could said more about the estates and how they like to make their wines. He could talk about the weather for the vintage and how he'll anticipate them to taste, reiterating that he has not tasted them and that his "review" is speculative.

[Michael Hann]

I think there is probably a way to handle this case without misleading people or getting people riled up. Hugh Johnson publishes an annual "Pocket Encyclopedia of Wine," or something like that. He reviews a large number of wines, but somehow I don't have the impression that he has tasted every wine for every year. So, when he says that the Clos du Val produces an elegant Cabernet Sauvignon often having good aging potential, I don't necessarily expect that he has drunk the 2006 vintage, for example. I'm taking his comments to be somewhat generalized. If the reader is given the impression the wine critic has sampled that specific wine, that is misleading and the writer ought to clarify that issue and remove that misapprehension.

[Mike Kerr]

I have a copy or two of previous years of Hugh's book and nowhere is he specific, and in many cases he is generic enough to provide a guide to wines as opposed to an authoritative source on a specific vintage.

His rating scale is 5 *'s, the descriptions are usually of the winery or generalities about the product, giving a general idea of the flavour profile for a particular line. And then he lists all of the recent vintages, giving a general indication if they are drinking well, can stand some cellaring, or are outstanding vintages, which is a generality that can be widely accepted if there's enough buzz about it.

I don't think there's any indication or inference that Hugh has tasted all of those wines, and even if he has, I don't think there's an expectation that he's putting anything out there beyond a pocket reference to wineries and wine lines and their recent histories. I think it's different what he's doing as opposed to what was referred to earlier in this thread about someone specifically making detailed tasting comments on a specific vintage of a specific wine. Hugh says "here's the wine, here's a little about it, what to expect, a rating on a 1-5 scale, a list of the most recent vintages over the last 10-20 years, which ones are ready to drink, which are highly recommended, and which should mature more.

Which reminds me I should pick up his latest one.

Mike.

[Michael Hann]

Mike Kerr:

I agree with you. I was suggesting Hugh Johnson's book is a good example of how to handle this situation well. I'm afraid I didn't state that clearly, my apologies.

[Mike Kerr]

Whups, my bad! I see what you mean now.

Consider my reply supporting material for yours.

Mike.